Tag Archives: patent infringement

Federal Circuit Upholds Inequitable Conduct Ruling in Ohio Willow Wood Company

By Joshua Branson on Posted in Federal Circuit, Patent
In the latest iteration of Ohio Willow Wood Company[1] (OWW), the Federal Circuit upheld a district court ruling of inequitable conduct against OWW despite the presence of a litigation screen. The Federal Circuit had affirmed summary judgment on invalidity, reversed a summary judgment ruling of no inequitable conduct, and remanded the case to the Southern … Continue Reading

Addition Through Subtraction, Broadening Reissue Upheld in Zoltek Corp. v. U.S., 2014-5082 (Fed. Cir. 2016)

By Shannon McCue on Posted in Patent
The Zoltek versus the United States case might be characterized as if at first you don’t succeed, try, try again…and then try one more time. Zoltek took three trips to the Federal Circuit before having the validity of its patent for materials used in the B-2 bomber and F-22 fighter planes confirmed. Even before filing … Continue Reading

Federal Circuit Tasked With Analyzing Evidence For Proof That Defendant Had the State of Mind Necessary For Induced Infringement

Photo of Scott SimpkinsBy Scott Simpkins on Posted in Federal Circuit, Patent
On January 19, 2016, the Supreme Court issued a grant-vacate-remand order in a dispute between rival medical device companies Medtronic and NuVasive. The order directs the Federal Circuit to revisit its decision in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., 135 S. Ct. 1920 (2015). Commil clarified that … Continue Reading

Momenta Pharma., Inc. v. Teva Pharma. USA Inc.

Photo of Stephanie Lodise, Ph.D.By Stephanie Lodise, Ph.D. on Posted in Uncategorized
In Momenta Pharma., Inc. v. Teva Pharma. USA Inc., Nos. 2014-1274, -1277, -1276, and -1278 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 10, 2015) (“Momenta II”), the Federal Circuit found that, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(g), “made” is limited to steps directly related to manufacturing products and excludes isolated quality control steps. The court also revisited its prior … Continue Reading

Methods of treating a subset of patients are likely nonobvious if the subset exhibits unexpected results

Photo of Ron KernBy Ron Kern on Posted in Uncategorized
In Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. v. Roxane Laboratories, Inc.,[1] a recent decision involving methods of treating a specific subset of patients, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) ruled that, although the claims of the patent at issue were invalid as obvious, singling out a particular subset of patients for treatment can still … Continue Reading

Denial of a Preliminary Injunction Against Twilio

Photo of Carrie LongstaffBy Carrie Longstaff on Posted in Uncategorized
Twilio, Inc. is a cloud communications company that earlier this year raised $100 million in funding, a figure that placed it in the Unicorn Club—those startup companies with valuations over a billion dollars. Twilio has made a name for itself as a cloud-based communications platform. But Twilio faced a problem when it was sued by … Continue Reading

Attorney Fees for Post-Grant Patent Challenge Proceedings Before the USPTO May Be Recoverable in Exceptional Cases Under 35 U.S.C. § 285

By Hans Smith on Posted in Uncategorized
Parties accused of patent infringement are turning more and more to post-grant challenge proceedings at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) as a faster and cheaper means for invalidating the asserted claims. A recent federal district court order indicates that the fees and costs associated with such proceedings may be recoverable if the … Continue Reading

Does ‘Raging Bull’ Deliver Knockout to Patent Laches Defense?

By Andrew Alexander on Posted in Uncategorized
Under Federal Circuit case law, patent-infringement defendants may assert the laches defense – an equitable defense barring claims brought after an unreasonable delay. But the doctrine will soon square off in the Federal Circuit against a heavy hitter: “Raging Bull.” In 2014, the Supreme Court decided a copyright case about the popular boxing movie “Raging … Continue Reading

Federal Circuit Affirms Finding of Infringement in SynQor v. Artesyn Techs.

By Dr. Lawrence M. Sung on Posted in Uncategorized
“This court also sees no reason why [the plaintiff’s] decision not to argue pre-verdict willful infringement at trial should preclude the district court from finding willful infringement for post-verdict sales.” On March 13, 2013, in SynQor, Inc. v. Artesyn Techs., Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Rader,* Lourie, Daniel) affirmed the … Continue Reading
LexBlog